Can somebody please explain why Russell is a GOAT and Rodman isn't?

[TheMan]

Yeah, I'm one of those who think Bill Russell is overrated and gets way too much credit for those Celtics 60s dynasty. Winning 11 chips is a great accomplishment but let's not get carried away. First of all, his competition was crap compared to the modern era of basketball. Bob Cousy was a "great" back then, nuff said. OK, when you ask the Russell junkies what exactly makes him the GOAT when you get past the TEAM accomplishment of 11 titles in 13 years, they tell you he was a GOAT defender and rebounder, he was smart and had all the intangibles and he affected his team's offense not by scoring but by his passing, grabbing offensive boards and his stellar outlet passes...that's cool and all but that's Dennis Rodman too.

Those of you old enough to remember, Dennis was a beast of a defender, he could guard bigs but was also quick enough in his prime to guard wingmen too. He defended against Shaq, DRobinson, Zo, PEwing, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and also defended Bird, Magic, Pippen and Jordan:eek: Bran Stans, THAT'S versatility. Dennis was huge in the mid to late 90s Bulls on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball, never having a play run for him but he'd grab ORebounds for putbacks or give the Bulls extra posessions. Plus, those defensive rebounds became pinpoint outlet passes to start the Bulls lethal fastbreaks. He regularly would end up with 10 plus points with 20 something boards with a couple of blocks to boot. Dennis, contrary to popular belief, was really smart on the court. He would get in your head to get you off your game, he ran the most complex offensive system, the triangle O, to perfection. He was a great passer.

If we gon' give Russell so much love for his defense, rebounds, blocks and intangibles, why not the Worm? You wanna talk chips? 5 outta 6 ain't chopped liver, and he did this in a much tougher era against the likes of Bird, Magic, Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, DRobinson, KMalone, CBarkley, JWorthy etc. That's an impressive list. To reiterate, he wasn't his team's first or second or even third scoring option, but Bill Russell wasn't either

What gives???

[DJ Leon Smith]

http://blacksportsonline.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Chris-Bosh-Crying.jpg

[mr.big35]

Jordan apostles :facepalm

[TheMan]

Great retort:bowdown:

You really gave an eloquent argument there, big fella:rolleyes:

[TheMan]

Admit it, I got you Russell jockers shook.

LAZ or CavaliersFTW, come at me bruh:mad:

[livinglegend]

Russell 5 MVPs ( same as Jordan) : rodman 0
Russell was the leader and the best player of his team : Rodman wasnt
Russell won 11 championships in 13 years ( he was injured in one of them)
Russell was a much better offensive player than Rodman
He was also better defensively

[Ca$H]

Yeah, I'm one of those who think Bill Russell is overrated and gets way too much credit for those Celtics 60s dynasty. Winning 11 chips is a great accomplishment but let's not get carried away. First of all, his competition was crap compared to the modern era of basketball. Bob Cousy was a "great" back then, nuff said. OK, when you ask the Russell junkies what exactly makes him the GOAT when you get past the TEAM accomplishment of 11 titles in 13 years, they tell you he was a GOAT defender and rebounder, he was smart and had all the intangibles and he affected his team's offense not by scoring but by his passing, grabbing offensive boards and his stellar outlet passes...that's cool and all but that's Dennis Rodman too.

Those of you old enough to remember, Dennis was a beast of a defender, he could guard bigs but was also quick enough in his prime to guard wingmen too. He defended against Shaq, DRobinson, Zo, PEwing, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and also defended Bird, Magic, Pippen and Jordan:eek: Bran Stans, THAT'S versatility. Dennis was huge in the mid to late 90s Bulls on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball, never having a play run for him but he'd grab ORebounds for putbacks or give the Bulls extra posessions. Plus, those defensive rebounds became pinpoint outlet passes to start the Bulls lethal fastbreaks. He regularly would end up with 10 plus points with 20 something boards with a couple of blocks to boot. Dennis, contrary to popular belief, was really smart on the court. He would get in your head to get you off your game, he ran the most complex offensive system, the triangle O, to perfection. He was a great passer.

If we gon' give Russell so much love for his defense, rebounds, blocks and intangibles, why not the Worm? You wanna talk chips? 5 outta 6 ain't chopped liver, and he did this in a much tougher era against the likes of Bird, Magic, Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, DRobinson, KMalone, CBarkley, JWorthy etc. That's an impressive list. To reiterate, he wasn't his team's first or second or even third scoring option, but Bill Russell wasn't either

What gives???

I agree Rodman would = Russell if he played in the weak 60s era.

[livinglegend]

I agree Rodman would = Russell if he played in the weak 60s era.

anyone can make statements like these.
Russell would average 30 ppg, 40 rbs and 25 blks per game if he played in Jordan s era.

[TheMan]

anyone can make statements like these.
Russell would average 30 ppg, 40 rbs and 25 blks per game if he played in Jordan s era.
:facepalm

Russell didn't average 25 in a weak era and he gon' ham in a tougher one?

Dat Bran Stan logic, doe:applause:

[TheMan]

Russell 5 MVPs ( same as Jordan) : rodman 0
Russell was the leader and the best player of his team : Rodman wasnt
Russell won 11 championships in 13 years ( he was injured in one of them)
Russell was a much better offensive player than Rodman
He was also better defensively
Stats nigguh, I've seen the breakdown when you adjust pace and Russell's stats aren't much greater than Rodman's. In fact, it's the opposite.

Inflated stats in a weak era:bowdown:

[livinglegend]

:facepalm

Russell didn't average 25 in a weak era and he gon' ham in a tougher one?

Dat Bran Stan logic, doe:applause:

with better nutrition and training, he would average 25 easily.
BTW, Jordan s era was one of the weakest. The only top 15 Jordan ever beat was Magic (by the end of his career).

[AnaheimLakers24]

kobe and rodman would win 8 chips together

kobe > kd > jordan > bran

[livinglegend]

Stats nigguh, I've sren the breakdown when you adjust pace and Russell's stats aren't much greatethan Rodman's. In fact, it's the opposite.

5 MVPs, 11 rings. Basketball is about winning. Russell won 11 as the best player on his team. THat s 5 more than Jordan.

[riseagainst]

with better nutrition and training, he would average 25 easily.
BTW, Jordan s era was one of the weakest. The only top 15 Jordan ever beat was Magic (by the end of his career).

never go full 'tard.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

5 MVPs, 11 rings. Basketball is about winning. Russell won 11 as the best player on his team. THat s 5 more than Jordan.

So you admit, Lebron needs at least 4 more chips to be equal to/better than Jordan? It's all about "winning" right...?

[secund2nun]

These are the reasons:

1. Russell played against white scrubs while Rodman played against real players
2. Nostalgia

Russell is overrated as hell. If I go to a playground and dominate a bunch of nerds does it mean I am a GOAT basketball player?

[Legends66NBA7]

Experts selections from the 69-80 circa on Bill Russell (quote from G.O.A.T.):

When he retired in 1969 Sporting News ran a feature on why Russell was the Greatest Player Ever. It cited the opinions of over 25 all-star players and NBA head coaches from the era.

In 1971 when the NBA voted for it's Silver Anniversary team, only Russell was a unanimous selection.

In 1980 when they selected the 35th Anniversary team, Russell was voted the greatest player ever.



Fast forward today, Russell is in talks with Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Tyson Chandler, etc... Whatever. It's been beaten to death already. Nobody is changing anybody's minds here.

[livinglegend]

Experts selections from the 69-80 circa on Bill Russell (quote from G.O.A.T.):

When he retired in 1969 Sporting News ran a feature on why Russell was the Greatest Player Ever. It cited the opinions of over 25 all-star players and NBA head coaches from the era.

In 1971 when the NBA voted for it's Silver Anniversary team, only Russell was a unanimous selection.

In 1980 when they selected the 35th Anniversary team, Russell was voted the greatest player ever.



Fast forward today, Russell is in talks with Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Tyson Chandler, etc... Whatever. It's been beaten to death already. Nobody is changing anybody's minds here.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[TheMan]

with better nutrition and training, he would average 25 easily.
BTW, Jordan s era was one of the weakest. The only top 15 Jordan ever beat was Magic (by the end of his career).
Wrong, Karl Malone and Barkley would be ranked much higher had they beaten MJ but he didn't let that happen:bowdown:

Shaq ain't top 15 neither:confusedshrug:

Would love to see your top 15 :rolleyes:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Russell is better in all the areas Rodman excelled in..

No different than Jordan being better than Kobe; Kareem being better than Ewing etc..

You gotta really study and educate yourself on Russell's career. His intangibles alone are why he's better...

[livinglegend]

Wrong, Karl Malone and Barkley would be ranked much higher had then beaten him but he didn't let that happen:bowdown:

Shaq ain't top 15 neither:confusedshrug:

Would love to see your top 15 :rolleyes:

Karl and Barkley are not top 15, and Shaq never very young n his team wasnt stacked like Jordan s.


Russell competed against legends like Wilt, Baylor, West, Petit, Oscar...

[TheMan]

Russell is better in all the areas Rodman excelled in..

No different than Jordan being better than Kobe; Kareem being better than Ewing etc..

You gotta really study and educate yourself on Russell's career. His intangibles alone are why he's better...
I love how everyone cites reasons as to why BR > DR but show no concrete evidence:rolleyes:

[livinglegend]

Jordan stans:
Russell s championship dont count because his team was very stacked.



Then, they come out and say that their 3rd best player Rodman is as good as Russell (considered as top 5 all-time by majority). :oldlol: So Jordan s team wasnt stacked?:oldlol:

[Legends66NBA7]

Karl and Barkley are not top 15, and Shaq never very young n his team wasnt stacked like Jordan s.


Russell competed against legends like Wilt, Baylor, West, Petit, Oscar...

The 95 and 96 Magic. The 98 and early 00's Lakers. The Heat in 05 and 06.

Shaq had a lot of talented teams around him. Most of, if not all the time, he was the reason they were that stacked. I would definitely consider some of those teams talented as Jordan's Bulls.

If you were just talking about the 90's, then that's still 3 teams (95, 96, and 98). I get that he's young, but even young and inexperienced players have made it deep in the playoffs before.

[TheMan]

Karl and Barkley are not top 15, and Shaq never very young n his team wasnt stacked like Jordan s.


Russell competed against legends like Wilt, Baylor, West, Petit, Oscar...
Yeah, Russell's teams weren't loaded:rolleyes: He wasn't even ROY, his teammate, Heinsohn won that award. Russell was often times 3rd or 4th scorer on some of his title runs.

Can you imagine the Heat winning with LeBron being his team's 4th scorer:oldlol: That's stacked. Or MJ's Bulls?

[livinglegend]

Yeah, Russell's teams weren't loaded:rolleyes: He wasn't even ROY, his teammate, Heinsohn won that award. Russell was often times 3rd or 4th scorer on some of his title runs.

Can you imagine the Heat winning with LeBron being his team's 4th scorer:oldlol: That's stacked. Or MJ's Bulls?

Jordan s team won 55 games without him.
His 3rd best player is being compared to Russell (considered a top 5 player of all-time).

[deja vu]

with better nutrition and training, he would average 25 easily.
BTW, Jordan s era was one of the weakest. The only top 15 Jordan ever beat was Magic (by the end of his career).
Jordan SWEPT Shaq. So what top 15 player did LeBron beat? (Aside from Duncan near the end of his career) :oldlol:

Anyway, Russell gets overrated too much. How could someone who's great on only one aspect (defense) be considered GOAT by some? Don't give me that 11 rings BS; he had 5-7 HOF teammates. That's more stacked than Miami and OKC combined.

[TheMan]

Jordan stans:
Russell s championship dont count because his team was very stacked.



Then, they come out and say that their 3rd best player Rodman is as good as Russell (considered as top 5 all-time by majority). :oldlol: So Jordan s team wasnt stacked?:oldlol:
Comprehension > you

Russell's team was stacked compared to his competition, Bob Cousy was a great back then. YouTube Cousy for the lulz. Cousy would be garbage today. MJ had a great team, guess what, you need a great team to win., ask LeBron, Magic, Bird...

OTOH, if Mike is not their leading scorer and getting those hard buckets at the end of Finals games, they weren't winning 6. If MJ was their 4th best scorer, you think they win? Yeah but the Bulls were hella stacked:rolleyes:

Hoops is a two way game, one dimensional ballers ain't GOAT in my opinion.

[TheMan]

Jordan s team won 55 games without him.
His 3rd best player is being compared to Russell (considered a top 5 player of all-time).
Did they win a chip doe, or even got to the ECFs:confusedshrug:

Russell isn't a top 5 IMO, that's the whole point of my thread.

He's massively overrated.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I love how everyone cites reasons as to why BR > DR but show no concrete evidence:rolleyes:

You've been given reasons.. Take your time and read the posts again

Scoring: Russell (great in the post, had a very nice off-hand, and, like Rodman, had a great feel around the basket)
Rebounding: Russell (adjusted for pace is close.. but Russell's timing and style was more efficient); all time, guy has about 10,000 more boards than Rodman
Passing: Russell (had playoff runs of 5+ assists and more.. was top 5 in career assists via the Celtics franchise before Rondo passed him in March; all-time, he has 3,000+ more assists than Rodman)

Blocks and steals weren't recorded in Bill's era, but I think its pretty safe to assume he had Rodman beat there too... Comfortably

Once again.. they might've done similar things, but Russell was another class of player. Far more productive and fundamentally superior..

[livinglegend]

Did they win a chip doe, or even got to the ECFs:confusedshrug:

Russell isn't a top 5 IMO, that's the whole point of my thread.

He's massively overrated.

They lost a close 7 games series against the Knicks who almost won the championship. Put Kobe on that team, they win the championship.

[livinglegend]

Comprehension > you

Russell's team was stacked compared to his competition, Bob Cousy was a great back then. YouTube Cousy for the lulz. Cousy would be garbage today. MJ had a great team, guess what, you need a great team to win., ask LeBron, Magic, Bird...

OTOH, if Mike is not their leading scorer and getting those hard buckets at the end of Finals games, they weren't winning 6. If MJ was their 4th best scorer, you think they win? Yeah but the Bulls were hella stacked:rolleyes:

Hoops is a two way game, one dimensional ballers ain't GOAT in my opinion.

Jordan s team was as stacked. They had the 2 best perimeter guys on that team , the refs, great role players ( Rodman who is being compared to Russell, Kukoc best euro, great shooters...). Any team that can win 55 games without their best player is stacked as ****.

[ILLsmak]

Yeah, I'm one of those who think Bill Russell is overrated and gets way too much credit for those Celtics 60s dynasty. Winning 11 chips is a great accomplishment but let's not get carried away. First of all, his competition was crap compared to the modern era of basketball. Bob Cousy was a "great" back then, nuff said. OK, when you ask the Russell junkies what exactly makes him the GOAT when you get past the TEAM accomplishment of 11 titles in 13 years, they tell you he was a GOAT defender and rebounder, he was smart and had all the intangibles and he affected his team's offense not by scoring but by his passing, grabbing offensive boards and his stellar outlet passes...that's cool and all but that's Dennis Rodman too.

Those of you old enough to remember, Dennis was a beast of a defender, he could guard bigs but was also quick enough in his prime to guard wingmen too. He defended against Shaq, DRobinson, Zo, PEwing, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley and also defended Bird, Magic, Pippen and Jordan:eek: Bran Stans, THAT'S versatility. Dennis was huge in the mid to late 90s Bulls on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball, never having a play run for him but he'd grab ORebounds for putbacks or give the Bulls extra posessions. Plus, those defensive rebounds became pinpoint outlet passes to start the Bulls lethal fastbreaks. He regularly would end up with 10 plus points with 20 something boards with a couple of blocks to boot. Dennis, contrary to popular belief, was really smart on the court. He would get in your head to get you off your game, he ran the most complex offensive system, the triangle O, to perfection. He was a great passer.

If we gon' give Russell so much love for his defense, rebounds, blocks and intangibles, why not the Worm? You wanna talk chips? 5 outta 6 ain't chopped liver, and he did this in a much tougher era against the likes of Bird, Magic, Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, DRobinson, KMalone, CBarkley, JWorthy etc. That's an impressive list. To reiterate, he wasn't his team's first or second or even third scoring option, but Bill Russell wasn't either

What gives???

I don't think Rodman is as good as Russell, but I think an all time team with him slotted as PF opposed to another all-time great would probably perform better or as well.

Dude was an amazing player, period. Kind of an amazing person, too, because he didn't give in to anyone. He never really made bad plays, either. I mean, on purpose... like Westbrook or Kobe would. He played good ball, he understood ball, and took basically nothing from the other 4 guys on his squad.

Really, he deserves to be in the conversation with guys like Russell as ultimate intangible players, but I think Russell was on a higher level. Could be wrong, but that's just the 'historian' in me speaking... although I hate to agree with people who comment on something I haven't personally witnessed. Gonna give them the benefit of the doubt for that one.

Rodman was a beast, tho. Top player, period. Anyone who calls him a glorified role player is a bball nub.

-Smak

[NumberSix]

I'm one of the leading proponents of Bill Russell being the most overrated player of all time. Dude is basically Joakim Noah.

[mr.big35]

I'm one of the leading proponents of Bill Russell being the most overrated player of all time. Dude is basically Joakim Noah.

but he is the GOAT in his era. just like Shaq is in this era.

[NumberSix]

but he is the GOAT in his era. just like Shaq is in this era.
I'd agree that he is one of the best in his own era. That's fair. I wouldn't dream of saying he's close to the player Hakeem was for example.

[fpliii]

:rockon:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Pace

PER adjusts pace...and for guys that have similar play styles, isn't too bad of a stat to use here, imo

Russell: 18.9
Rodman: 14.6

Also wanted to correct myself. Russ actually has 4,100 assists to Rodman's 2,600...

[fpliii]

PER adjusts pace...and for guys that have similar play styles, isn't too bad of a stat to use here.

Russell: 18.9
Rodman: 14.6

Also wanted to correct myself. Russell actually has 4,100 assists to Rodman's 2,600...
PER doesn't exist pre-78 anyway, since we don't have all of ORB, BLK, STL, TOV before then. basketball-reference.com zeroes them out:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

PER doesn't exist pre-78 anyway, since we don't have all of ORB, BLK, STL, TOV before then. basketball-reference.com zeroes them out:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/per.html

Pretty much..

Kinda sad we dont have these stats recorded. Wilt and especially Russell would be regarded much higher, imo.

[BoutPractice]

I'm one of the leading proponents of Bill Russell being the most overrated player of all time. Dude is basically Joakim Noah.
On steroids. Which is probably the best player in the league today, and certainly top 3.

[fpliii]

Pretty much..

Kinda sad we dont have these stats recorded. Wilt and especially Russell would be regarded much higher, imo.
We have most (maybe all) of the unofficial block numbers mentioned in newspapers on nbastats.net, but yeah, shame most of them are lost forever.

[TheMan]

They lost a close 7 games series against the Knicks who almost won the championship. Put Kobe on that team, they win the championship.
Kobe is an all time great though...

[TheMan]

I'd agree that he is one of the best in his own era. That's fair. I wouldn't dream of saying he's close to the player Hakeem was for example.
:cheers:

Or any number of all time GOAT bigs...

[jlip]

@TheMan...

How many playoff series did Rodman ever lead his team in points or assists?

[LAZERUSS]

@TheMan...

How many playoff series did Rodman ever lead his team in points or assists?


Exactly.

How many times did Rodman average 23 ppg on a .543 FG% in the Finals, including a 30-40 game seven?

Or an 18-25 .702 FG% series in his Finals?

Or, as you said, led his team in scoring in the Finals, at 24 ppg and on a .538 FG%?

Hell, how many times did David Robinson and Patrick Ewing accomplish those feats in their Finals?

[LAZERUSS]

And I always found it fascinating that Rodman, who was not an exceptional leaper, or blessed with incredible size or strength...could just pummel the best rebounders of his era....the Robinson's, the Hakeem's, and the 7-1 325 lb Shaq's.

Russell was 6-10, with a 7-4 wingspan, and world-class leaping ability. If Rodman could outrebound those guys by five per game, just what would have Russell done to them? Obviously the 90's rebounders were very inept and weak.

[ThePhantomCreep]

Russell is a touch overrated (Wilt was clearly better), but comparing him to Rodman is preposterous. Russell was a 5x MVP, and would have won minimum 6 Finals MVPS had they existed in his day. Rodman never came close to winning in any of his 6 Finals appearances.:facepalm

[LAZERUSS]

I'm going to be brutally honest here...

Rodman would probably have been nothing more than a role player coming off the bench in the 60's. He didn't have the offensive skill-set to start. Maybe with Boston he might have been a Satch Sanders, but most starters in the NBA at the time had to be multi-faceted, and were expected to be capable of scoring.

Russell would have done much better in Rodman's era, than Rodman would have in Russell's.

[KevinNYC]

Yeah, Russell's teams weren't loaded:rolleyes: He wasn't even ROY, his teammate, Heinsohn won that award. Russell was often times 3rd or 4th scorer on some of his title runs.

Russell wasn't rookie of the year because no one yet knew what Russell was doing. Basketball writers back when Russell came in almost unamiously thought
guy who scores most points = best player.

Also Russell was in the Olympics that year and didn't join the Celtics until December. Heinsohn played 72 games while Russell played 48.

Red Auerbach in his book, said he didn't even know what Russell was doing. He saw the impact however and he understood his greatness, but he said he didn't know how he did it. He took Russell aside late in his first year and said, "You know you're the best player in this league?" and Russell said "I know." That year Russell finished 7th in MVP voting. Auerbach realized that he needed to coach basketball writers to see the game better and started talking up Russell achievements, prior to that the writers would be shocked when Bob Cousy was injured for several games and the Celtics would keep winning. They almost inevitably lost when Russell was out.

The "stacked teams" of the Celtics were not a dynasty without Russell, they lost before he joined them. They started winning once he joined them. They kept winning once those original squads retired, and the stopped winning immediately after Russell retired.

John Wooden say Russell was the best defensive player he had ever seen.

As for his offensive output, Russell DELIBERATELY took a backseat to his teammates on offense because it made for better chemistry.

In 13 years, his team lost his final game twice, one of those years he was injured in the finals. The other year was his first year as player coach and he lost to one of the all time great NBA teams, the 68 win 76ers, a team that had Wilt Chamberlain playing team ball and averaging 8 assists a game.

The dude is just an amazing winner and had a monster career.

He was far, far, more involved offensively than Rodman was.

[sd3035]

never go full 'tard.


it's way too late for that guy

[KevinNYC]

And I always found it fascinating that Rodman, who was not an exceptional leaper, or blessed with incredible size or strength...could just pummel the best rebounders of his era....the Robinson's, the Hakeem's, and the 7-1 325 lb Shaq's.

I think you're not giving Rodman his due here.

http://www.trainbodyandmind.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/194.dennis-rodman-1-600x936.jpg

Dude, was very strong and could leap. The thing you are missing that he was truly exceptional, was his motor. He might have had the best cardio in the league. He used to do an hour or more on a stairmaster after a game. Combine that energy with his effort and his strength and his leaping ability even if they were not as elite you may be thinking about and his career because less of a surprise. He understood leverage very well too. I would bet his leg strength was up there with any one.

[SexSymbol]

BR has 11 rings, nobody has ever come close to it that hasn't been in his team.
BR is the undisputed GOAT.

[livinglegend]

Russell wasn't rookie of the year because no one yet knew what Russell was doing. Basketball writers back when Russell came in almost unamiously thought
guy who scores most points = best player.

Also Russell was in the Olympics that year and didn't join the Celtics until December. Heinsohn played 72 games while Russell played 48.

Red Auerbach in his book, said he didn't even know what Russell was doing. He saw the impact however and he understood his greatness, but he said he didn't know how he did it. He took Russell aside late in his first year and said, "You know you're the best player in this league?" and Russell said "I know." That year Russell finished 7th in MVP voting. Auerbach realized that he needed to coach basketball writers to see the game better and started talking up Russell achievements, prior to that the writers would be shocked when Bob Cousy was injured for several games and the Celtics would keep winning. They almost inevitably lost when Russell was out.

The "stacked teams" of the Celtics were not a dynasty without Russell, they lost before he joined them. They started winning once he joined them. They kept winning once those original squads retired, and the stopped winning immediately after Russell retired.

John Wooden say Russell was the best defensive player he had ever seen.

As for his offensive output, Russell DELIBERATELY took a backseat to his teammates on offense because it made for better chemistry.

In 13 years, his team lost his final game twice, one of those years he was injured in the finals. The other year was his first year as player coach and he lost to one of the all time great NBA teams, the 68 win 76ers, a team that had Wilt Chamberlain playing team ball and averaging 8 assists a game.

The dude is just an amazing winner and had a monster career.

He was far, far, more involved offensively than Rodman was.

:applause: :applause:

After this comment and Lazeruss s ones, OP wont ever compare Rodman to Russell. :oldlol: